Dynasty League Football Forum

Cameron Giles wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 1:51 pm Every RB is replaceable in the right situation. However, it doesn't take long to recognize RBs who have skills, traits and talent that differ from the typical. Conner and Samuels are not those guys. They can still produce in Pittsburgh though.

It's funny how most Pro-Connor arguments are being used against them right now. "Connor can do everything Bell does" and so apparently can Samuels... I bet Ridley could do it if they needed him to

Jigga94 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 4:21 pm

Cameron Giles wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 1:51 pm Every RB is replaceable in the right situation. However, it doesn't take long to recognize RBs who have skills, traits and talent that differ from the typical. Conner and Samuels are not those guys. They can still produce in Pittsburgh though.

It's funny how most Pro-Connor arguments are being used against them right now. "Connor can do everything Bell does" and so apparently can Samuels... I bet Ridley could do it if they needed him to

doubt Ridley could do the same...

Jigga94 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 4:21 pm

Cameron Giles wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 1:51 pm Every RB is replaceable in the right situation. However, it doesn't take long to recognize RBs who have skills, traits and talent that differ from the typical. Conner and Samuels are not those guys. They can still produce in Pittsburgh though.

It's funny how most Pro-Connor arguments are being used against them right now. "Connor can do everything Bell does" and so apparently can Samuels... I bet Ridley could do it if they needed him to

Bingo. While Conner was better than I initially imagined and I was wrong on that, I never bought into the growing narrative that he was some great RB on his own. Sure, as long as he's getting the volume and opportunity in this offense he can continue putting up big numbers. But opportunity for RB's is not permament unless you are truthfully a special RB.

Cameron Giles wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 5:07 pm

Jigga94 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 4:21 pm

Cameron Giles wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 1:51 pm Every RB is replaceable in the right situation. However, it doesn't take long to recognize RBs who have skills, traits and talent that differ from the typical. Conner and Samuels are not those guys. They can still produce in Pittsburgh though.

It's funny how most Pro-Connor arguments are being used against them right now. "Connor can do everything Bell does" and so apparently can Samuels... I bet Ridley could do it if they needed him to

Bingo. While Conner was better than I initially imagined and I was wrong on that, I never bought into the growing narrative that he was some great RB on his own. Sure, as long as he's getting the volume and opportunity in this offense he can continue putting up big numbers. But opportunity for RB's is not permament unless you are truthfully a special RB.

Not permanent no. Nothing is. You can always get lucky to find an adequate rb who gets a longer than anticipated, Alfred Morris type of push, though.

Also...I think both Conner and Samuels are more than replacement level.

Valhalla wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 5:16 pm Also...I think both Conner and Samuels are more than replacement level.

I haven't really seen anything from either to make me think so. Samuels is a prototypical third-down back and Conner is a hard-running power back. I think there's a lot of RB's in the NFL who could put up comparable numbers in the offense.

Jigga94 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 4:21 pm

Cameron Giles wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 1:51 pm Every RB is replaceable in the right situation. However, it doesn't take long to recognize RBs who have skills, traits and talent that differ from the typical. Conner and Samuels are not those guys. They can still produce in Pittsburgh though.

It's funny how most Pro-Connor arguments are being used against them right now. "Connor can do everything Bell does" and so apparently can Samuels... I bet Ridley could do it if they needed him to

Sample sizes are relevant. No?

JFever wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:23 pm

Jigga94 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 4:21 pm

Cameron Giles wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 1:51 pm Every RB is replaceable in the right situation. However, it doesn't take long to recognize RBs who have skills, traits and talent that differ from the typical. Conner and Samuels are not those guys. They can still produce in Pittsburgh though.

It's funny how most Pro-Connor arguments are being used against them right now. "Connor can do everything Bell does" and so apparently can Samuels... I bet Ridley could do it if they needed him to

Sample sizes are relevant. No?

I'm using hyperbole here obviously....... But one could argue Connors sample size of less than a full season is way less than Bell's portfolio... The same way 2 games for Samuels is matching Connors production relative to Bells....

Do you at least see my point? I'm not asking you to say Samuels is better than Connor or Connor is better than Bell. It is strange though that all these RB produce in this offense.

If Connor & Samuel are just average players and products of the Steelers system, then why isn’t that true about
Bell??

If I were an NFL team, I wouldn’t touch him with a ten foot pole.

Forza_Azzurri wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:55 pm If Connor & Samuel are just average players and products of the Steelers system, then why isn’t that true about
Bell??

If I were an NFL team, I wouldn’t touch him with a ten foot pole.

Yup. Not for over 10 Million anyway. Bells strategy of sitting to make more money has backfired. He thought the Steelers would crumble without him and that teams would be lining up to pay him. Maybe he still gets paid by a desperate team but now he just looks like a dumbas

Forza_Azzurri wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:55 pm If Connor & Samuel are just average players and products of the Steelers system, then why isn’t that true about
Bell??

If I were an NFL team, I wouldn’t touch him with a ten foot pole.

Because Bell demonstrates elite ability outside of the Steelers opportunity.

Cameron Giles wrote: ↑Tue Dec 18, 2018 7:07 am

Forza_Azzurri wrote: ↑Mon Dec 17, 2018 9:55 pm If Connor & Samuel are just average players and products of the Steelers system, then why isn’t that true about
Bell??

If I were an NFL team, I wouldn’t touch him with a ten foot pole.

Because Bell demonstrates elite ability outside of the Steelers opportunity.

Based on what exactly? When different RBs continue to put up numbers in this system, the "Bell demonstrates elite ability" ship continues to take on water and sink. You may be the captain of that ship and if you're going down with it, more power to you.

I really don't know what to tell you if you can't sit down with an objective eye and separate Le'Veon Bell from James Conner and Jaylen Samuels.

But hey, I guess Damien Williams is just as good as Kareem Hunt too.

Cameron Giles wrote: ↑Tue Dec 18, 2018 7:34 am I really don't know what to tell you if you can't sit down with an objective eye and separate Le'Veon Bell from James Conner and Jaylen Samuels.

But hey, I guess Damien Williams is just as good as Kareem Hunt too.

Saying Bell or Hunt is better than (insert RB here) is entirely different than saying Bell is "clearly elite" when the system continues to produce RBs. You have no facts or legs to stand on in this. You're just dug into your stance and using the ole "eye test" as your reasoning because your stance is crumbling and you dont want to admit it.

Again, you fail to accept that any system in the right situation can continue to produce quality RB production without a premier RB behind it. Alfred Morris put up big numbers when Elliott was suspended. Thomas Rawls put up numbers when Lynch was out. There are plenty of examples. The Shanahans have a history of taking late round RBs and making them stars in their scheme.

If you can't legitimately recognize that Bell is different from the other two backs, then I really don't know what to tell you. It's not even meeting the baseline of an honest conversation. He is arguably the most complete back in football.

Cameron Giles wrote: ↑Tue Dec 18, 2018 7:54 am Again, you fail to accept that any system in the right situation can continue to produce quality RB production without a premier RB behind it. Alfred Morris put up big numbers when Elliott was suspended. Thomas Rawls put up numbers when Lynch was out. There are plenty of examples. The Shanahans have a history of taking late round RBs and making them stars in their scheme.

If you can't legitimately recognize that Bell is different from the other two backs, then I really don't know what to tell you. It's not even meeting the baseline of an honest conversation.

Now you're changing the argument entirely.

Do I think Bell is better than Conner and Samuels: Yes I do.

Do I think Bell is "clearly elite": No I dont. Not after what I've seen that system do this year.

When all you have is the "eye test" to stake your claim on one side; that is the equivalent to someone saying "because I said so".

Now all those guys you mentioned that had very RB friendly systems, which one of those studs that looked elite left that system and maintained stud status elsewhere? That's what you're saying Bell will do right? Since he is "clearly elite." Those backs leave that system and arent heard from again. Why? Because they were as much a product of their system as they were talented.